Tuner Garages

  • Thread starter Kent
  • 2,497 comments
  • 227,489 views
Actually, now that things are in this point, the cars have been entered etc, shouldn't wer put up a committee to think about the next challenge?
 
Quite possibly! I hadn't even entertained the notion of what the next competition could be, but if you want, it can't hurt to go ahead and start a feeler thread for it in the Tuning Garages section and let the ideas fly!! 👍
 
too late, I already started a thread thanks to a sudden urge. :ouch:

oh well, it can always be merged.. Kent,if you're around, could you see that this is done?
 
Well, I now know what my 80's entry will be. Hello, RUF BTR '86 :drool:

This thing scares me on S3's...But I pulled a 1'50.xxx with it before applying settings!
 
CraftyLandShark
RUF showdown ... excellent! Dimplz has one entered too I think.
Click to expand...

O_o. He probably entered a Yellow Bird. I picked lower power for a reason. I'd turn it club racer if I could...

I just can't figure out how to make that back end stick a little bit. I'm glad I've got a car that doesn't understeer, I'm happy though. I just want the back to stay mostly in line...

50 ballast at -25. In the weight balance, the negative numbers are the rear, right?
 
Nope, that's forward.

And since it's a rear-engine car, you'd want to try 0 ballast full forward. Then increase from there if needed.
 
Really? Because I tend to doubt dragstrip numbers lying. Weight moved positive is rearward as evidenced by my drag cars getting better traction with more weight over the rear, and less when moved forward (excluding the Civic, which is FWD)...
 
I don't do much at the drag strip, but under road racing conditions, in my experience in MR or RR cars positive values always stabilize the car - I used this in my Alpine. With neutral or negative values, it slung the back around like it had an anvil in the engine compartment. In FR cars, negative values seem to reduce understeer, which I assume(d) was because it brought the weight balance closer to 50/50. Its possible that it's technically operating under the theory that more weight in the front (negative values under your theory) would equate to more of a tendency to rotate in the back, but that makes no real sense since no weight has been REMOVED from the back, simply added to the front.

Either way, I guess its useless to try to deduce how a weight transfer system works when that system works ... when no actual weight is added. I'm just going to experiment from car to car and keep on doing what works in practice.
 
Yeah I just did a bit more experimenting... I think I know why I got the odd results I was getting.

This is my first real foray into using weight balance, so it's still a bit of a black art to me. Thanks 👍

And MustangGT - don't be afraid of the negative value then I guess, if you've already tried them and they worked well - I had excellent results in my RR Alpine using negative values (which are apparently rear-biased). The major areas of improvement were turn-in and (somehow) overall stability. In an RR, this MAY be because you tend to have to go pretty stiff up front to resist dive under lift and braking which can badly destabilize the car, but the front stiffness itself causes understeer once safely into a corner. The extra weight in the rear, as long as it doesn't cause more slide, may be helping to counteract that frontal resistance. Just a theory, but it worked on the Alpine in practice.
 
I mean like, do I just paste it all into a post or do I send it to someone?

I assumed I just post it, but I want to make sure.
 
Alright alright, I'm done. I got the pre '63 cars judged and written up.

Now its safe to say you 5 owe me about 300,000 credits EACH :ill:

Division: 1963 and Earlier
Car: Chevrolet Corvette Convertible (C1) '54
Owner: nd 4 holden spd
Mileage of car at purchase: 0.0miles
Performance figures of car match tuning sheet: Yes

Track used: Trial Mountain

Review (before settings applied): The moment I started driving, I was shocked at the gear ratios that this Corvette had. I literally was bouncing off the rev limiter in 5th gear going a bit over 100mph. However, despite quite literally driving the entire track at 100mph, the feeling the car gave me around corners was amazing. I was clearing corners at high speed with minimum effort. The front wheels let me put the car anywhere I wanted in a corner, even under full throttle. The rear wheels didn’t go out of line during high speed corners, but gave me a good, yet mild power oversteer feeling during 3rd gear corners. The Corvette can pull very well through its gears, but because of the short ratios, it’s limiting this car's potential by a mile. Also because of this, I could not give it a proper high speed braking test.

Overall: This is an incredibly easy car to drive, but its let down by its short gearing.

Laptime: 1'39.620

Review (settings applied): Immediately I noticed how much better the new gear ratios were to before. I was now no longer bouncing at 100mph, and now barrelling down the back straight at 145mph. The improvement the settings made is easily seen in the lap times. Compared to before, the Corvette now rode lower, and stiffer, but still felt easy to drive, and I still could put it anywhere I wanted. The brakes performed well, way better than I expected from a car from the '50s. The mild power oversteer was now found in 2nd gear, which helped a lot in getting the lower lap times. This car in this state of tune is an excellent combination, and a dramatic improvement over a standard tuned Corvette.

Overall: Gearing much more improved over standard, and even after increased suspension stiffness, is still easy to drive.

Laptime: 1'31.549

Final Score: 90/100
Click to expand...
Division: 1963 and Earlier
Car: Lotus Elan S1 '62
Owner: CraftyLandShark
Mileage of car at purchase: 0.0miles
Performance figures of car match tuning sheet: Yes

Track used: Trial Mountain

Review (before settings applied): The gear ratios appear a bit short, but a top speed of 115mph isn’t bad. Acceleration feels good, reaching its top speed in a short time. The main feature I found though, even without settings being applied, is how fun this car is to drive. I can either take a corner flat out, nailing the apex at high speed, or I can feint the car in, put my foot to the floor and do some impressive drifting. Even someone of low drift experience or skill can make this car go sideways. Its very fun to drive, and very controllable. Brakes perform well, but that’s a result of the low weight of the car.

Overall: Insane fun to drive, very controllable, good acceleration despite short gears.

Laptime: 1'35.632

Review (settings applied): The new gear ratios I think are a bit too long. I was able to hit 140mph on the back straight with plenty of revs to go, however I feel that maybe some length in the gearing could be sacrificed to bring back some of the rapid acceleration of the shorter gear ratios. However, this is only a small problem. The new suspension settings have made the car into a much more controllable car, and much better for high speed cornering as the lap times show. However one thing I found was that it was less fun to drive than before. I could no longer throw the car into corners and take them sideways like before, instead the car just either wouldn’t let go of the road or it would slide off it. This is probably a result of the suspension being stiffened, and the revised LSD settings. Brakes performed as before, and performed well at 140mph.

Overall: Still a controllable car that can go fast and handle well, but the fun factor has been turned down a notch by the suspension stiffness.

Laptime: 1'33.482

Final Score: 85/100
Click to expand...
Division: 1963 and Earlier
Car: Jaguar E-Type Coupe '61
Owner: nissan tuner
Mileage of car at purchase: 0.0miles
Performance figures of car match tuning sheet: Yes

Track used: Trial Mountain

Review (before settings applied): Probably the strangest car I've encountered so far in terms of parts installed. Sports spec clutch and flywheel are used, as well as the original gearbox, which is a 4 speed. The common trend is to use racing variants of these parts, but this E-Type seems to be fine with sports items. Upon acceleration it’s easy to see why the gearbox was not changed. Power is plentiful and pulls well through the gears, hitting around 135 to 140mph on the back straight. Handling wise the E-Type feels solid and rides over bumps well, with a hint of understeer at high speeds. However 2nd gear allows some very entertaining power oversteer. Brakes are very good, stopping from 140mph was very good, on par with a modern sports car.

Overall: A fun car at low speeds, but a bit of a handful at high. Sports clutch and flywheel actually performed well too.

Laptime: 1'40.347

Review (settings applied): As only the LSD and suspension settings were adjusted, the comments about brakes and acceleration are still valid when the car is set up. However now, the car feels a lot more stable, and is easier to corner at high speed. Understeer is still noticeable, but not as much as before. 2nd gear power oversteer still exists, so low speed cornering was not sacrificed to increase high speed cornering. Slides are also much easier to control than before, which I believe is the handiwork of the LSD settings.

Overall: For a car that has had very basic tuning done to it, it performs very well. Handles well, fun to drive and pulls well.

Laptime: 1'39.179

Final Score: 90/100
Click to expand...
Division: 1963 and Earlier
Car: Alfa Romeo Giulia Sprint Speciale '63
Owner: Greycap
Mileage of car at purchase: 0.0miles
Performance figures of car match tuning sheet: Yes

Track used: Trial Mountain

Review (before settings applied): The acceleration of this car is very good, probably due to the low weight and short gearing. However, because of the low weight and power, it’s possible to take every corner full throttle, in complete control. By far this is the most fun car I've tested. Any gear, all I had to do was feint into a corner, and I had the Alfa's 45 year old body at 45 degree angles. The suspension feels soft, however it rides the bumps well and doesn’t understeer at all. Brakes do a good job, but again the lightweight body doesn’t take much to stop.

Overall: Very fun to drive, at any speed and you always feel like your in control.

Laptime: 1'39.895

Review (settings applied): Compared to before, the suspension actually feels the same, despite the changes in settings. A notable difference was the gearing, I was able to reach higher speeds in each gear, including 6th. The LSD also felt a lot better, allowing me to slide a lot more freely, but not uncontrollably. One thing I noticed is when I took the first chicane too hot, I ended up airborne, when the car landed, the landing was soft, and didn’t bounce me back upwards, and I was able to complete the lap unharmed. The fun factor was not lost when the car was set up, which kept the car fun to drive.

Overall: An entertaining ride, very controllable. Perfect combination of power and weight.

Laptime: 1'39.696

Final Score: 95/100
Click to expand...
Division: 1963 and Earlier
Car: Mercedes 300SL Coupe '54
Owner: Leonidae
Mileage of car at purchase: 0.0miles
Performance figures of car match tuning sheet: Yes

Track used: Trial Mountain

Review (before settings applied): First thing I noticed when driving this car was that it was too overpowered. The rear wheels spun all the way through to 3rd, and occasionally 4th. Its fast in a straight line, doing 145mph on the back straight, but cornering is a different story. This car easily overwhelmed its rear tyres, and was almost undriveable at low speeds due to the wheelspin. Brakes performed well however.

Overall: Fast in a straight line, but too powerful for low speed cornering.

Laptime: 1'38.602

Review (settings applied): With the lengthened gear ratios, wheelspin stopped at 2nd gear, which improved 3rd gear cornering a lot. However, the car was still slightly tail happy, which a few times ended up in exiting corners in reverse. The brakes slowed the car down well, an improvement on the already good brakes. I think car is more suited to wider, high-speed tracks than tight and twisty tracks. The suspension is spot on for a car of this type, but the power the car develops is too much for S3 tyres to handle on a 2WD chassis.

Overall: Settings improved the cars driveability, but the power ruins it. Could probably do much better with just a NA Stage 1 or Stage 2 tune.

Laptime: 1'36.025

Final Score: 70/100
Click to expand...
I just want to say its been fun testing these cars. 👍 And even more fun repeating the 1000 miles race just for that Alfa :crazy:
 
*scribbles* "Stop (mumble) listening to (grunt) Clarkson. Powaaaaahhh! isn't the solution when going for handling.."
 
Ouch... not an impressive showing for the Elan! Let's hope it fares better in later judging.

If you're using it at Trial, the gear ratios would I suppose seem a little long, but it's tuned to be usable on straights as long as GVS - there, it reaches the redline a bit short of the limiter, using every bit of its power. I never wanted it to be a drift car - it's supposed to grip and grip and grip to the end. I'm a bit confused as to what you mean by the stiffened suspension causing that though - the FC Suspension's default settings are MUCH stiffer than what I used, and cause the car to bounce off curbing like a jackrabbit on crack. And without the LSD, it loses a lot of speed out of corners. But if you're looking for a car that can go sideways, I guess this definitely isn't the car for you.

Not being argumentative btw, just had to defend my baby :sly: And on the flipside, if you like more playful cars, you should enjoy my 2000GTO!

Thanks for all your effort! 👍
 
CraftyLandShark
I don't do much at the drag strip, but under road racing conditions, in my experience in MR or RR cars positive values always stabilize the car - I used this in my Alpine. With neutral or negative values, it slung the back around like it had an anvil in the engine compartment. In FR cars, negative values seem to reduce understeer, which I assume(d) was because it brought the weight balance closer to 50/50. Its possible that it's technically operating under the theory that more weight in the front (negative values under your theory) would equate to more of a tendency to rotate in the back, but that makes no real sense since no weight has been REMOVED from the back, simply added to the front.

Either way, I guess its useless to try to deduce how a weight transfer system works when that system works ... when no actual weight is added. I'm just going to experiment from car to car and keep on doing what works in practice.
Click to expand...

That would explain why the pendulum got stronger...

The car is going to need some front weight, seeing as at the moment it's being driven like a drift machine to 1'50 laptimes...:nervous:

After reading those reviews, I guess I should have mentioned to be easy on the throttle of my 'Cuda untill about 4,000 RPM in 3rd gear. It will pull some nice times though.

Now I start MY nailbiting! I've only got one hand of nails 'cause of that guitar:scared::crazy:
 
Day 1 of my off week starts this afternoon, so I should have pre-63 judging results posted by tomorrow, and post 63 probably by this weekend.
 

Similar threads

Dave A
Gran Turismo mode for GT5
Replies
22
Views
2K
Tenacious D
Tenacious D

Latest Posts

Back